U3O8 at $200 = only 18.75% increase in total production costs.
Maybe :)
I probably screwed this all up, but I took the numbers from the 2 links I posted, and attempted some calcs.
I rounded 24% & 26% to 25% and I changed U3O8 $52 to 50....just to make the math quick and simple.
So....
U3O8 at $50 is 25% of total fuel cost, which is 25% of total production cost (so U3O8 is about 6%).
..so total fuel cost = $200, and total production = $800.
If U3O8 = 100, then total fuel = 250 & tot.prod = 850.
If U3O8 = 150, tot.fuel = 300, & tot.prod = 900.
If U308 = 200, tot.fuel = 350, & tot.prod = 950.
At $200 U3O8 (a 300% increase from $50), total production cost is up $150, which is only 18.75% more than the original $800.
The total fuel cost would now be 36.84% of total production, but is still waaaaaay less than fuel costs of coal (78%), Nat.gas (94%) and oil (91%).
Like I said, I probably read things wrong and screwed this all up, ...so if nothing else, you'll get a giggle out of my mess.
If I somehow got it right, then we see U3O8 has plenty of room to go up big time before it has a serious impact.
Regards,
CB. |
